GeezerCouple

Would your travel insurer be more useful? What have they said about this? GC

Oh, I agree that OP should NOT "need" an attorney. But for whatever reason, this seems somehow quite complicated now. And OP is reasonably concerned that they may end up being held responsible for what may well be a moderately large sum, one that most of us never actually see, as most governments don't bill the patient being medevac'd off a ship. >> Or so I assumed before hearing about a bill from the Portugese authorities anyway. I have no idea if there was another way to handle this from the start. [One thought I had is that *IF* Kaiser is, I think (?), a health provider rather than a "travel insurance company", then this claim may be quite different than what most of us deal with for travel insurance claims. But that may not be the case anyway.] GC

You are a very far distance from us, many states away. So any attorneys we use (in two states) wouldn't be helpful for work in a third, different state where they are not licensed. All I can say is that we have used attorneys at various times (for things more complicated or urgent than a real estate closing, for example) and we've never found it impossible to get help with a sort of demand letter, even if it isn't [yet!?] a demand for money itself. Note that in some cases, this does provide back up should there be claims later, plus it can indeed create the impetus for *someone* to start the ball rolling...... I do agree that it could be exceedingly helpful if you could get your narrative into some bullet points, and without trashing NCL et. al. Trash them here, or later elsewhere, but *not* in the narrative that you need to show an attorney to explain your situation. And also try *very* hard not to trash them in the first meeting with any attorney. Otherwise, they may well miss the forest for the trees... (And use just a few of the *most* important aspects when you call to make an appointment. Otherwise, they will have trouble figuring out what type of situation this really is. Is it medical? Personal Injury? Financial, and if so, what kind....? Don't overlook the fact that *many* of us here have mentioned that we ARE having difficulty keeping track of the full scenario. And look how much time/effort has been expended, but us AND BY YOU. One concise list/summary would have helped us a lot.) [To assist you with that, keep in mind that attorneys charge by the hour or minute, etc. As I was told once, it might be less expensive to do the "complaining" to a shrink or friend, and focus on the legal issues 'here'. Yes indeedy! 😉 ] GC

Several of us have made the same/similar suggestion, yet you keep ignoring it, or rephrasing it. There is a huge (HUGE) difference in an attorney "not taking your case" (as you phrased in initially) vs. "not interested in helping you", as you've just written it. Which attorney told you, exactly: "Writing a letter to Oceania/NCL Holdings warning them that they need to respond or we will no longer be responsible for payment would hold no legal weight whatsoever." If YOU write a letter like that, sure, probably "no legal weight whatsoever". But if an attorney writes that letter, using *specific legal languange as appropriate and has it legally served", that is VERY different indeed. And this (initial communication, letter writing) does not, at this stage, involve "taking your case", so I'm not sure where that idea originated. There are legal meanings in these two and they are *NOT* the same thing. "Not taking a case" would tend to mean you wanted to sue someone... that you actually have a "legal case" (emphasis on *case*, which could be a massive endeavor, especially against a huge corporation, who probably have far deeper pockets than you do). OR... what we have suggested, have the attorney "help you", but "writing a letter". There is no long term endeavor in this... simply a relatively short task, billed hourly. You can keep complaining here about this OR you can ask an attorney to send a letter such as has been suggested (by us and others, some of whom have actual professional legal experience). You can do both, of course, which is also fine: complain here AND get that letter sent. Did you really mean that NO attorney (after asking several) would even "help you" by writing that letter? I honestly cannot even imagine the full aggravation you've experienced. You are worried about possibly being held accountable for a large sum, and you cannot get the proper persons (or corporation) even to be appropriately responsive. But there is a different way to handle it that you seem not to want to explore. There isn't "a legal case" yet. [You definitely want to *avoid* it becoming "a legal case" if possible... absolutely!] At this stage, just get "help" (with a letter), but not "for a case". It's not time to "sue anyone". GC

This is *not* correct, for at least several insurance vendors and policies. as long as it is started within 10-20 days of making the very first payment (depends upon state). And then the same to add additional payments to cover additional non-refundable trip costs as those are made. Please contact by *phone* an insurance agent or broker, to make sure you understand the conditions AND they understand your situation to best be sure your situation is in compliance with whichever policy you get. The "fine print" can really matter. We have done this exact process on many occasions through TripInsuranceStore, and never had a problem with any of our claims (including several large ones). GC

Any update on the status of the repairs or when next cruise may actually depart? Thanks. GC

First: I think all of us (or almost all?) DO understand the aggravation. It seems absurd, yes. But you do need to deal with it to resolve this! Next: AMHuntFerry has the perfect answer. Or one of possible perfect answers(??). 😉 "Pay an attorney to send a letter that says something to the effect of "we won't pay this bill until proof of payment is shown. You have until X date." It's amazing what a simple letter from an attorney can accomplish." It can really be an eye-opener to send a letter from an attorney. (Possible downside: Vendor may respond something like, "You are starting legal action [you have not yet done this, btw, at this stage], so we will only contact you through our legal department." That would be TERRIFIC: You and your attorney will have a direct contact to those who will far more likely to "get it", and once they realize you do NOT "want money", but just documentation (how often is that what is requested/demanded!?), they are likely to want to end this before it might escalate. Yes, I'm probably being a bit optimistic, but let's hope...) Hopefully, either corporate or legal will do *something*, if the letter is from a real attorney. You aren't threatening litigation (not yet, right?) and you aren't demanding any damages, etc. Just documentation! Given the aggravation you've already gone through (considerable!) and the risk of someone trying to get the money from you personally... a small legal fee would be well worth it in our minds. Just speak with an attorney about this type of relatively simple letter. You can continue to be quite rightfully angry, but first, get the nonsense ended! Otherwise, it seems you'll continue to spin your wheels and fret more and more. Let us know if/how this works! GC

I'm having trouble understanding just what this means. Since when does a bill from a major existing business not constitute proof that payment must be made? I'm thinking about, say, a blll for insurance reimbursement. Suppose we have a company come out to replace the fence and landscaping from when a driver skidded off the road and plowed through some of our front yard. We had the fence replaced, for example. We used a bill from the fence installation company, and our insurance reimbursed us. Did our insurer ask for proof from the FenceCo that they had, say, paid their lumber supplier and paid their workers, etc.? If they did, we never heard about it, and have never heard of anything like this before. I could perhaps understand a bit more, er, "proof of payments" if, say, the bill was from Mr/Ms Rumplestiltskin down the street, who had no existing business entity for such work. Is this really a "thing", or is someone just trying to delay - or avoid? - payment? GC

Yes, THIS! ^^ Some of those laundry tags, from various ships (and hotels, etc.), stay on the clothing for a remarkably long time. And some seem to be secure enough that there are no edges or corners to irritate... and similarly, none leading to the little label getting torn off, knowingly or not. I really enjoy the occasional time I unexpectedly stumble across one of those labels. Some of them are in slightly out of the way places, so they probably get less "tugging"... and also get noticed less often. Fun! GC

This doesn't quite make sense, if you think about it from O's position. What if you don't end up taking the cruise (e.g., you get sick). They've paid the money for your visa from your OBC, not from an invoice to you that you have to pay. If you cancel the trip, the OBC isn't relevant anymore. But O would have forked out the money on your behalf anyway. It's one thing to use OBC "in advance" when it's being used to pay for a cruiseline service, such as upscale dining (which doesn't cost extra on O, but does/might on other lines). They aren't giving any outside/non-ship party some money that they plan to collect from you. The visa gets paid for, and it doesn't matter if you ever show up or not: The visa is still paid for, by O on your behalf, and waiting for you. It can't be "returned" or "sold to another passenger", or such. Use the OBC for something "on board", something provided by O, not something they are paying someone else for in advance for you.. Now, *IF* they allow the OBC to be used for this, I'd be surprised, unless you've agreed to reimburse them once they've paid... But hey... I've heard of crazier things, so it's "worth asking them"... 😉 GC

I agree with FlatbushFlyer: You aren't trying to sue anyone with a big liability claim such that an attorney would spend lots of time hoping for something like 1/3 of a large payout. That's when 'someone takes your case'. You need an attorney to 'go after' someone who owes you money (or a letter that satisfies the debt/etc., in this odd case). That's done at an hourly rate; there's no claim of injury or malpractice claimed here. Either you aren't phrasing it right for the attorneys or you are somehow finding attorneys who specialize in something like "personal injury" litigation. In many cases, a "real letter" (not phone calls) from a "real attorney" (not from you or some other individual, etc.) can get the ball moving. Also, I agree about the "deadline" usually being to FILE a claim. If it's a deadline to complete the claim and receive the money or you *never* get the money, then many, many insurers would be *veeeery* slow to pay... leaving many of their insured without timely payments and no further way to continue the claim. 😡 Good luck, and it's time to have a professional (e.g., attorney) get involved in pursuing this. But you pay them; they don't need "a big case" to work hourly. If the money at stake is minimal, then perhaps it's less costly to just pay the bill, but "medevac off a ship" sounds "expensive". GC

This ^^ We were astonished at the laundry service. We had a Neptune Suite on our first HAL cruise, on the Noordam, and somehow we missed advance mention of the "free laundry", or we'd have packed a bit less. One time, we just put two pairs of socks out. 😉 Even with more items, it was always back surprisingly quickly, less than 12 hours. And... folded/arranged *so* neatly. Really amazing. It was a wonderful cruise overall (New Zealand & Australia). We've had other "wonderful cruises", but never laundry service like that! GC

Who *is* your insurance from, the actual insurer? And from what you are reporting, especially with the time limit looming, I'd strongly suggest that you contact your state Insurance Commissioner's Office. Insurance is regulated by the states. And even if your insurer doesn't yet have all the info they need (??), they should know how to handle this type of claim. So let the state Office help them, too. They may well know how to handle a snafu like this. [I hope so!] I'm glad it was possible to do the medevac. (One thing that has worried us as we get older is... how long will the "longest time to serious medical" going to be for any trup.) GC

Our Alaska cruise wasn't on HAL, and our experience with HAL is only with Noordam (which we enjoyed in New Zealand/Australia *very* much!). We carefully chose a NB itinerary. We wanted to enjoy the "landscape" on shore. early in the season. We wanted the scenery to be likely to get more dramatic as the cruise continued on, rather than the other way. So we also carefully selected starboard side, which on a one-way cruise Vancouver to Seward/etc., would have the shore almost entirely on the starboard side. It was definitely the right decision... for *us*. Others may have different preferences. We also enjoyed the inside passage, which isn't usually included unless on sails from Vancouver. (Seattle departures usually go outside of Vancouver Island.) We thought the Hubbard Glacier was the high point; we enjoyed it more than Glacier Bay. There was a LOT of calving, and the Captain let us stay there for a long time, slowly spinning the ship so everyone could enjoy that view even if they weren't roaming around on the ship (which is recommended for this itinerary... it's ALL so gorgeous!). Enjoy! GC

CDNpolar gave a very good answer above. However, I would like to explain a bit more about one thing they wrote: Travel insurance policies can differ in some respects. Some cruise-line specific insurance (purchased from or offered by the cruise line may indeed give their CFAR benefits as a "credit" for future sailings, and not "cash back". However, many 3rd party policies (purchased from a separate insurance company) will give "CASH BACK". That means you can just keep the money or spend it on an entirely different vacation or something else. Often, for CFAR, the "cash back" - and even the "credit back" - coverage is for something like 75% of the costs, not 100%. So it could be you'd get back, say, 75% in cash [or a credit, depending] rather than all of your money back. It's better than nothing, definitely, if you need to change your plans and the reason is *not* a "covered reason". For a "covered reason", it is typically a full refund. But ALWAYS read the specific terms and conditions of any policy that *you* are getting, as policies can differ in many ways. Also consider any transportation to get to the cruise. Would you be flying? If so, is that included in the "casino deal"? If not, then you may want to include the transportation costs in any insurance. But as PDNpolar mentioned, that's only if the costs are NON-refundable. If you get refundable tickets, then insurance wouldn't pay.... but you'd have no need for that coverage. And if you decide to get travel insurance for this trip or some other, make sure that you understand the definition of "pre-existing condition". That can be very different than its usage in everyday life. Sometimes that works out better, and sometimes not, depending upon the actual underlying medical issue. Sometimes there are deadlines to purchase travel insurance if one wants it to cover certain things, so double check. BTW, "taxes and gratuities" are often refundable anyway if one cancels, so again, double check that before purchasing insurance for those costs. GC

When we were first learning about travel insurance, we realized something very important about the annual plans with annual $$$ limitis, regardless of their terms. IF one used up the coverage limits before the year was up, but while there were still trips to take during that coverage year, it would have been very likely that it would have been too late for us to get the coverage we wanted for a "per trip" policy for any trip(s) remaining in that coverage year. And it would probably be too late to cancel the trip and get a full refund. Not good... This was pointed out when we were speaking with Steve (of TripInsuranceStore.com) rather early in our travel insurance experience. I doubt we would have realized this otherwise. There were other reasons why an annual policy was not going to work for us back then, but this reason wasn't obvious to us, at least not to us at that time. GC

This ^^ ... or the same if you purchased the travel insurance from some other agent/broker! Especially if they are getting a commission, well, they should be providing the associated service with the policy, if requested. This is one of the reasons to use an agent/broker rather than purchasing the coverage directly from the insurer. You get someone to help IF help is needed. Another reason, of course, is to have some professional help with selecting the coverage type that is best for *you* and *your* travel circumstances. A policy that is great for one person may not be at all appropriate for someone else. Without input from someone very familiar with the various polices/coverages, it can be incredibly difficult to understand if there is something in your particular circumstances that would make a particular policy a "bad fit", etc. And the time to find out that Policy A is not a good fit for you is, um, NOT when you file a claim and it gets denied. 😠 Purchasing travel insurance from an agent/broker doesn't (shouldn't?) cost the traveler anything extra, at least in the USA. It may be different elsewhere... We use TripInsuranceStore. We found them incredibly patient when we were first trying to figure out what type of policy to get. And all of our claims have been paid*, without nonsense, so it really did work out well! * One exception: RECEIPTS really are needed. We had one tiny portion of one claim denied. I didn't think to get a receipt for the *tip* for a taxi. It was too small an amount to bicker over, but I did learn that receipts really are important. GC

We *always* get travel insurance! We learned about that here on CC, and purchased it for our first trip after that. That was a very special (and $$$$) trip... And less than 2 weeks before our planned departure, DH had a medical emergency! We got every cent back. IF we had not had that insurance, we both think we may never have purchased another "special" trip, we'd be so annoyed. As it turned out, we've continued to have "more special" trips, even more expensive, and the travel insurance has allowed us to not worry so much. But keep in mind, for some people, it's not the cost of the trip, but the potentially very high costs of medical care elsewhere, so make sure you are comfortable with that. Your travel costs are mostly capped; you know what you'd lose. But for medical care, for something very serious, who knows what it might cost; there's not really any "cap". Thus, many here at least get insurance for potential medical costs, even if most travel costs aren't covered. GC

As CDNpolar suggested above, unless you have CFAR (Cancel For Any Reason) insurance, if you "want to cancel" because someone is sick, you may not get reimbursed. Usually, that would require a rather dire medical situation such that a physician says something like, "Uh... sorry... but we advise that you *not* leave town now...." It's not so much that you "just prefer not to leave..." But check the terms of your policy to see if a physician's letter is required or such. And you should get the forms filled out *now* if you decide to make the claim. The insurer is likely to need contemporaneous medical information, rather than having someone think back... (If *you* were hospitalized while you would have been traveling instead, then your own hospital record would suffice, at any time.) You want to have the best chance of getting reimbursed if you don't have CFAR coverage. We always got CFAR coverage, in part because of very elderly MIL (late 90's). We knew if she were very seriously ill, a physician would advise that we not leave. But if she were "just" complaining that she "didn't feel right"? (I know that is NOT your situation.) Well, she *always* said, "You GO! Do NOT worry about me. I'll be fine!! Go. GO!" But at her age, IF she ever didn't say that, but only that "she didn't feel right", that would mean something likely very serious. But the regular insurance would never cover that, so... we got always got CFAR (but also for our own purposes). As it turned out, less than 2 weeks from a planned departure for a very special Med cruise + 2 weeks in Italy... MIL landed in the hospital for cardiac "tests". So we were very glad we had CFAR. But we still hoped she'd be "cleared" and go home, hoping the medical team would say something like, "It was nothing, but at her age, we wanted to be sure..." But they kept having to do more tests, and then *more*. We were getting ready to complete the CFAR paperwork (the decision needs to be "more than 2 days before departure"; I've never understood that). With about 4 days to go, while we were starting to fill out the CFAR forms and given them to her physician, her medical team suddenly told us... "Uh... we now recommend that you NOT leave town after all..." 😞 Bad news...! So we had them fill out the regular insurance paperwork, and we cancelled the entire trip under the regular insurance. Fortunately, she did recover, and a week later she was sent home. The timing was just "off" for our trip. It was a very special cruise itinerary, one we've been looking for ever since but never seen again. Sigh. But MIL came first, of course! Hope things settle down for you within the next two weeks or so, and that your FIL does get better, whether you decide to take the trip or not... IF you got your insurance through an agent or broker, ask them for advice about how and when to file a claim. That should be part of their services. We did rely in part on the advice of our travel insurance broker (Steve, at TripInsuranceStore.com). He's always a great help, especially with anything uncertain. GC

Keep in mind that sometimes there are changes to the itinarary. So IF that ends up changing to include a country that does have 6-month timing, the ship would need to have the passengers suitably qualified. And it's apparently not sufficient to say, "Well, we won't get off the ship". I think (can someone clarify?) that once the ship is in the country's "waters", all passengers are considered to be "in the country". (Even if that turns out not to be correct, the ship may not want to need to deal with "some passengers can't legally leave the ship", etc.) To be safe, to avoid risking being turned away from boarding, I'd double check the laws of each country planned *and* determine what the cruiseline requires for that particular sailing. And I wouldn't accept the answer of just one person at some phone bank for something important like this. They may not know the correct answer... Get it in writing. GC

1) There are plans that would allow the traveler to cancel the trip and receive full refund if there was a delay for a specific number of hours? There wouldn't be any requirement to try to join the trip at a subsequent port (assuming that is legal, which is not always the case)? 2) And the way you've written your response makes it seem that there are policies that would offer coverage to get a full refund IF, say, inclement weather caused a delay of a common carrier for a specific number. That sounds like one wouldn't even need to miss the cruise departure... I've never been quite clear about the first scenario above... how does that actually work? (And I'll assume the second scenario was simply wording of the reply, and not any actual insurance coverage. But IF there is a policy that IS written that way...??) Thanks. GC

For *ANY* special needs, including diets, ALWAYS contact the cruise line well in advance. Cruise ships aren't like hotels; no one can dash over to the corner shop to get <whatever> would help a guest, etc. And "even more so" for a cruise like Antarctica, where there are no shops at all along the way. We each have a special dietary need, and: a) We contact any meal provider [cruise ship, conference banquet, friend with a dinner invitation (this can be a bit awkward, but is necessary), etc.] well in advance; b) We always have "something else" with us in case it turns out there is not something suitable. These are usually snack bars, because they travel well and have a long shelf life (aka, suitcase life!). As for Hurtigruten, we also found that the "substitute" was "Here is <whatever>", and there were no choices at that mealtime for the special selection. However... it was definitely possible to speak with someone in the Dining group to discuss preferences, at least among the possibilities that were on board. And if there were some favorites that you'd like repeated, just tell them. 🙂 GC

If wearing the boot is helping you at the time you are leaving, I'd *strongly* suggest that you bring it along. As for space, yes they are bulky (understatement!). So why not wear it? That way, if you end up needing it, you'll have it. It would be a shame to wish you had it with you... but not have it. When I needed a boot and was traveling (twice), even if as I was sort of weaning myself off it, I definitely wore it on travels so I'd "have it there" if necessary. And that did come in handy a few times. I'm sure the medical center would have supplies, but they may (reasonably) be restricted to use by the medical team. I'd guess they can't start carrying enough assorted medical supplies for those who just didn't want to deal with the effort/inconvenience of bringing those supplies along and "preferred" to use equipment on the ship. But I could be wrong. (Maybe they do have some, and mark them up to exorbitant prices... as the ship does with many things!) GC

[editing added] Yes, indeedy. That's just how I remember my Econ 101... when sales are going GREAT, that's when to reduce the prices. "NOT!" 😉 (Of course, if they want to suggest causality in the other direction, that it took lowering prices to drive sales, well, okay then... 😠 Very wise.) GC

Not sure what you mean by a "reaction", but in a way, "yes" - but nothing negative. This was in the Before Days. When we "checked in" at the MDR Desk, we noticed a slip of paper was generated, and it included a mention about the food allergy. That slip was handed to the person each time who escorted us to our table. We were delighted that they were making use of an additional way to avoid a problem. Yes, we also ALWAYS mention it to waitstaff when ordering: "... and this is the <special prep> dish, correct?" We do that for every course, every meal. (And we do this at every restaurant anywhere, of course, not just Oceania!) GC